A Democratic candidate for California’s 60th district in the state assembly is attempting to rewrite internet history after making a Facebook post deriding the Democratic party for what he claims is a party “take-over” by the pro-choice movement, which included what many are calling sexist views on a woman’s right to choose.
ORIGINAL STORY: Teen California State Assembly Candidate Puts On Ruby Slippers
On September 16th, Jacob Daruvala, a Democratic candidate for state assembly in California’s 60th district produced and quickly deleted a Facebook post that outlined his views on a woman’s right to choose, and lambasted the Democratic party for following what he claims is an “unscientific” stance on the issue of abortion.
The post caught the attention of many Facebook pages and caused a mounting backlash to form against what many liberal voters called “Tea Party” and “Rand Paul” leanings in the Democratic candidate.
“I usually don’t speak out on this because I am concerned of the feedback from my fellow Democrats.
I do not identify with the pro-choice movement. I am deeply upset at how they have taken over the Democratic Party and now it is almost a requirement to be a viable Democratic candidate. What upsets me the most is that it is framed as a women against men issue.
There is no rational reason to say it is a women against men issue, when polls show it as a 50/50 issue among women! If it truly was just men oppressing women, it would not be so evenly divided. The other thing that concerns me about the pro-choice movement is how anti-science it has become.
So many act as if a developing human is an animal, and should not be given any consideration as to its candidacy as a potential human. I actually had someone tell me “Who cares if she kills the damn thing anyway?” Seriously?
When I identified with the pro-choice movement, I would say that no one is pro-abortion, it is pro-choice. Well I stand corrected on that. In the same conversation, he told me “the baby has no right to forcibly occupy the woman’s property.”
That baby had no choice in anything! The baby didn’t crawl up there to hide, she put it there! That is one of the most anti-science statements I have ever heard.
Although I believe that the life of the child should be taken into consideration, I do not really identify with the pro-life movement either. I believe there should always be exceptions for rape and incest, I believe there should be a culture of understanding rather than slut shaming, and I believe that we should be looking at other solutions first, such as improving access to health care, child care, and especially contraception.
Please just think about it. I hate speaking up on this issue because it is the only way I get yelled at by fellow Democrats.”
On September 18th, Daruvala responded to the article written by Liberal America on his campaign Facebook page, and when responded to by the author of the article, deleted the author’s rebuttal and proceeded to blanket the original article with comments defending himself.
There has been an article written about me which has taken my words completely out of context.
First of all, the writer, Jeromie Williams, was fired from two liberal internet news sites, because (among other things) he STOLE a press release I gave solely to YoungProgressiveVoices.com.
Second, the post from which he found my personal thoughts was deleted only 3 minutes after I posted it because it did not clearly express what I wanted it to.
Third, in this article, he says that my comment “she put it there” was saying that a woman bears sole responsibility for the child. That was not even remotely close to what my statement meant. Of course a man was involved in the process, that is how reproduction works. My statement was simply that a woman involved in consensual sex takes part in creating that child (ALONG WITH THE MAN) and the child had no choice in being created! That is exactly what I said. Look at the statement yourself here:
“In the same conversation, he told me “the baby has no right to forcibly occupy the woman’s property.” That baby had no choice in anything! The baby didn’t crawl up there to hide, she put it there! That is one of the most anti-science statements I have ever heard.”
This man’s extremely irresponsible “journalism” was nothing more than an out of context hit piece out of vengeance. I never once said the man is absolved from all responsibility.
My post was not that abortion should be banned, it was that the life of the child should at least be considered. It was a RESPONSE to someone who told me, “Who cares if she kills the damn thing anyway?”
I know if you read that statement, even if you’re pro-choice, that statement made you cringe.
In the spirit of transparency and full disclosure, the author of the original article, Jeromie Williams, is the author of this article as well, and attempted to rebut Daruvala’s claims on his campaign page Facebook post. The rebuttal made by the author was not only deleted, but he was banned from posting on the page entirely. Here is the deleted rebuttal:
To clear up your erroneous facts, let me go through one by one and address your concerns.
1 – The fact is I had not written for either Addicting Info or Young Progressive Voices in over two or three months and had moved on to other pastures a long time ago. Removing my writing privileges was simply a matter of house keeping that was spurred by events listed next.
2 – There was no “theft” of a press release in any shape or form. I was part of a writing group that the press release was published to asking for someone to cover it as a story. There were no conditions placed on it, and it was deemed as fair game. What I did do however, and have ultimately apologized for, was not writing about the press release for Young Progressive Voices, and instead having someone else write it for another site. If I am to take my lumps for anything, I’ll take them for that.
3 – Your statements stand for themselves. You chose your words, you put them onto the Internet, and then deleted them 12 minutes (not 3 minutes) after your posting. Clearly there was something in there you did not want seen, and are now spinning damage control because they have been entered into the public arena.
4 – This was absolutely not an act of revenge, and your classification as such simply shows just how off base you are once again with your opinions. This article was written because what you posted was newsworthy, it was insightful and it bared discussion.
If you’d like to rebut the claims in a follow up article, I would be more than happy to set that up, and give you a chance to speak on your own behalf.
But I have a feeling that’s not likely to happen with handlers you have at this time.
In an effort to repel the swell of interest in the story, Daruvala has seemingly attempted to white wash the collective memory of the internet and selectively groom a story line that fits his campaign and his lapse in judgement that saw him lash out at his own party, and alienate women voters in his district.
The internet has a way of remembering things, and when running for public office it is wise that any candidate whether new or old, Republican or Democrat, pro-life or pro-choice, take the time to carefully oversee what they post to social media to avoid the kind of slip-ups that can pitch them into hot water, or at the very worst, cost them an election.